***OMT - Tottenham Hotspur vs. Saudi Sportswashing Machine***

[braineclipse]

As you suggest, Conte didn't have much choice but to go 3-5-2 with the players available to him on Sunday. But for 20 minutes it worked well and we created a lot of chances ( Son could have had a hattrick in this period) . However, as soon as they scored , it all fell apart.
I would like to know why no journalist asks Conte the tough questions -

1. Why don't you change things earlier when you can see things are failing? Same criticism against United where we allowed 28 shots against us?
2. Why do you persist with playing out from the back with players unsuited to do so?
3. Why do you insist Son defends corners and free kicks? Wouldn't he be better further up the pitch?
4. With Peresic on the pitch and able to deliver an inswinging corner from the right, why was Son taking an out swinging corner - which he promptly put straight out of play
5. When chasing the game and needing a goal, why did you bring on two defenders - Davies and Doherty?
6. With nothing to lose, on a wet pitch against big defenders, why didn't you bring on Gil and Spence for some pace, guile and creativity?

I think we fans deserve some answers to these questions.

We don't know the answers to those questions from Conte, probably wouldn't really know even if he was asked. Journalists don't ask because they want to be liked, get access, get good quotes rather than the anger tougher questions would bring.

1. I can only assume he doesn't really trust his options. Makes some earlier changes when there's someone he does trust (Perisic for example).

2. Because the option of hoofing it to Kane and Son isn't good either. At least by trying to play out we can succeed or at least develop. Wouldn't want him to change.

3. I'm guessing there's been a lot of analysis/data work on this question by many clubs. So seemingly reaching the same conclusion. Having Son deeper to occasionally win the ball and start a counter attack from there has more value.

4. We've had some success with both? I think sometimes we just try to keep up the pace as well as we can by having a player closer to the corner when it's close.

5. Because Davies is good on the ball and a decent attacking threat. Better than Lenglet so far. Doherty is a better attacking wing back than Emerson. Spence "isn't ready yet" or just seen as less likely than Doherty to make a positive impact at this time.

6. We had "nothing to lose", but we had a lot to potentially gain by getting a goal. Conte obviously made the decisions he thought were most likely to get us that goal.

 

[Finney Is Back]

As you suggest, Conte didn't have much choice but to go 3-5-2 with the players available to him on Sunday. But for 20 minutes it worked well and we created a lot of chances ( Son could have had a hattrick in this period) . However, as soon as they scored , it all fell apart.
I would like to know why no journalist asks Conte the tough questions -

1. Why don't you change things earlier when you can see things are failing? Same criticism against United where we allowed 28 shots against us?
2. Why do you persist with playing out from the back with players unsuited to do so?
3. Why do you insist Son defends corners and free kicks? Wouldn't he be better further up the pitch?
4. With Peresic on the pitch and able to deliver an inswinging corner from the right, why was Son taking an out swinging corner - which he promptly put straight out of play
5. When chasing the game and needing a goal, why did you bring on two defenders - Davies and Doherty?
6. With nothing to lose, on a wet pitch against big defenders, why didn't you bring on Gil and Spence for some pace, guile and creativity?

I think we fans deserve some answers to these questions.

I would imagine the answer to question 3 is because it is likely to aid the counter attack. Teams feel that they can suck in lots of the opposition and leave huge amounts of space in behind that can be exploited in only 2 passes. Leaving an attacker up the pitch generally results in the opposition leaving 2 players back and also one to cover the space between the penalty box and half way line and that can make it less likely that the team will be able to be successful in a counter.

Question 5, it is because when chasing the game, neither of those players are supposed to be 'defenders'. Doherty should basically be a playing as a winger and Davies should be creating underlaps and overlaps on the left.

 

[Pirate55]

we are currently caught between a rock and hard place without Kulu - i mean on paper maybe Spence as RWB in 352 will give us more threat down that side but that's far from a certainty at this stage and then may leave our defense more exposed.

Having a player like Maddison to call on now would make a world of difference

Exactly. We need a player that makes it 3 - 4.5 - 2.5

Kulu is currently the only one in the squad that can make this work.

 

[thfcsteff]

I don’t boo, but I can understand it.

It’s wrong to dismiss the booers as the ‘prawn sandwich phalanx’ (not that you did, but Steff seemed to). I was in the North Stand and there were plenty booing around me. Ordinary supporters can shell out upwards of a hundred quid on a match day now, once ticket, transport and food and drink are factored in. When they see one-dimensional football played with middling effort, along with seasoned professionals making basic (and repeated) errors, then they are well within their rights, I think, to express their opinion.

I think that is fair comment, but it won't change anything on the pitch. Rights are what they are my friend, impossible to argue that and I wouldn't dare. My opinion, however, is that at the ground, in the moment, encouragement and support is a hell of a lot more helpful. Thus I am
not into booing. Alas it is the way the world is these days, and I appreciate my increasingly 'ancient' way of seeing things is ever out of step...